Oath L. The end is but to secure your Loyalty M. The End is one thing and the Means another We are ready to give better security of our Loyalty than this which I before intimated to you Do you think in your Conscience that all the Souldiers in England and all the Corporation-Officers and entrusted Persons and all the Vestry-men and all the Ministers are so well skill'd in Politicks and Law above Bishop Bilson Grotius Barclay and all the Tribes of Learned Lawyers Casuists Canonists Philosophers c. before named as that they can take such an Oath in Truth Iudgment and Righteousness Swearing Allegiance and renouncing Rebellion is easily known to be every Subjects Duty But to unty knotty Controversies in Law is sure above every vulgar Brain Why was not this way found out to prevent all the Civil Wars in the days of the two Williams of Stephen of Henry the 1st and 3d. of K. Iohn of Edward 2d of Richard 2d of Henry 4th and Edward 4th and Henry 6th and Richard 3d. and to prevent the Insurrections in the days of Q. Mary and Q. Elizabeth Why do they not this way decide all the Controversies at Liege Colen c. to make the People determine them by Oath All Politicks agree that the Difference between near Subjects and Slaves is that the former have propriety which none can take from them but by their Consent at least in their Wives Children and Lives and that Slaves have none such nor may resist a Commission to take them away though causlesly and Laws are there but the Will of the Lord who may cross them at his pleasure and that a Ruler of Subjects and an Owner of Slaves thus differ Now if it be a Controversy Whether the English be meer Subjects or Slaves the ignorant Vulgar are no fit Judges to decide it and that by Oath CHAP. LV. POINT XII Whether all Trusted in Corporations may declare That there is NO OBLIGATION on them or any other Person from the Oath called The League and Covenant M. I Spake to this before but a little on the by it being no XII part of the Ministerial Conformity Ministers are only to subscribe or swear that the said Oath bindeth no man to endeavour any Alteration of Government but the Corporations are to declare That there is no Obligation at all from that Oath on them or any other I have read much of the History of Heathens Mahometans and Christians and I confess I remember not that ever I read the like to this The likest to it that I remember was in the long Wars and Contentions between the Pope and the German Emperour when they sware and unsware and sware again as either Party got advantage And that Popes and Councils have Decreed the dissolving of Oaths of Fidelity to those Kings whom the Pope Excommunicates is commonly known but Protestants know no such power L. This Declaration is to be expounded by the many following Acts which only say there is no obligation to Change the Government M. That 's gratis dictum without proof that several Acts have the same meaning when the words so much differ is not to be presumed One of them is an Universal Negative without the least exception and the other a particular Negative only 2. And the Acts were made at several times to several men and the Parliament in the latter never pretended to limit or explain the former which sure they would have done if they repented of the Terms 3. And Parliament Men tell us That it was mentioned that the Non-Obligation of the Covenant should be limited and it was pleaded against it That if men believe that they are bound by it to any thing some will think that they are bound to all that is lawful and that it 's lawful to take Arms against the King and so there is no securing them from Rebellion as by that Covenant but by renouncing all its Obligation And this carried the Cause 4. It is not lawful for Subjects to put a particular Sence on Universal Words imposed unless the imposers first so expound the Terms which they have refused to do after twenty years complaint of the Dissenters and do justifie the universal sence to this day Therefore such forced Expositions of our Rulers words in so tremendous a matter are not to be feigned without good proof L. We say Bonum est ex Causis integris There is Evil in that Covenant therefore it is an Evil Covenant M. That 's none of the Question it may be Evil in that part that is Evil and the thing it self may thence be denominated Faulty or Evil and yet not all that is in it be Evil nor it Evil simpliciter but scundum quid Do you think all is Evil that is there Vowed L. If it be Evil no one is bound to keep it M. No not in the Evil part But do you think that the conjunction of some Ill things in a Vow or Covenant doth disoblige a man from all that 's good in it If so mark what will follow 1. Man is so ignorant and imperfect and faulty that he doth nothing that 's good without a mixture of some evil how can sinless perfection come from sinful Imperfection And so we should be bound by no Vow or Oath or Contract at all 2. If Knaves once learn this Lesson they will be sure to foist in some ill clause into their Vows to GOD and their Covenants with Man that so they may be bound by none 3. The Oath of Allegiance or Fedelity to the King and the King 's own Oath at his Coronation in the time of Popery had ill clauses in it for the Papal interest doth it follow that neither of them did bind 4. If an Irish Tory should on the high-way meet an English Lord and take his Purse pretend that he is against the King and should force him at once to take an Oath to be true to the King and to give him his Estate and conceal his theft The latter is evil and yet even that Oath bindeth to be true to the King. 5. If the Clergy in their Ordination in time of Popery had divers sinful clauses and promises doth it follow that their Ordination was null and obliged them to no Ministerial Duty 6. If the Clergy in former ages or in France or Spain be sworn to the King and the Pope doth it follow that this binds them not to the King because it binds them not to the Pope 7. If men were Married in time of Popery with unlawful Words and Clauses or lately in England by Justices in new terms was such marriage null 8. If a Papist make to you a Testament or Deed of Sale of his Estate and put in some unlawful clauses appealing to Angels or wishing you to pray for the Souls in Purgatory I do not think you would take that Will or Deed for a nullity 9. If in Popery or here some Clauses at Baptism prove bad it doth not
place in the Ministry without Presbyters Ordination and who then durst not be twice Ordained And for Churchmen that must be strictly Religious to suffer on such terms I cannot speak against But we secular men think these too little things to suffer for M. If your consciences can call such prophanation of Gods Name such condemnation of Protestant Churches such strengthening the hands of a little thing they shall be no measure for our consciences For we believe that we must die and that there is a God and a righteous final Judgment CHAP. VI. II. Of the Covenant and Oath of Canonical Obedience to our Ordinary or Bishop L. WHat harm is there in your promising or swearing obedience to your Ordinary in things Lawful and Honest. What a man should do he should not refuse to swear or promise M. I will first tell you the words imposed and then I will state the Controversie and then I will tell you our Reasons The Words at Ordination are these 1. On Deacons and Priests Will you reverently obey your Ordinary and other chief Ministers to whom is committed the Charge and Government over you following with a glad Mind and Will their godly Admonitions and submitting your selves to their godly Iudgments Answ. I will so do the Lord being my help The Form of the Oath which they use to impose is this Ego A. B. Iuro quod praestabo Veram Canonicum Obedientiam Episcopo Londinensi ejusque successoribus in omnibus licitis honestis And little know we of What Religion their Successors will be or who will have the choosing of them I 'le not swear to I know not who The Bishops themselves also must take this Oath of due Obedience to the Arch-bishop In the Name of God Amen I N. chosen Bishop of the Church and See of N. do profess and promise all due reverence and obedience to the Arch-Bishop and to the Metropolitan Church of N. and to their Successors So help me God through Iesus Christ. L. What is your Controversie against any of this M. 1. We do not question the duty of obeying the King and all his Officers governing as Magistrates by the power of the Swords which the King may commit to them If Bishops or Lay Chancellors be made Magistrates we will obey them as such And therefore when they summon us we appear and answer because the King authorizeth them And many Non-conformists have defended the taking the Promise as supposing that the Word Ordinary signifieth only the Judge of a Court set up by the King as Supream Governor by the Sword in matters and over persons Ecclesiastical as well as Civil according to the true sence of the Oath of Supremacy 2. We do not refuse to promise and swear due Obedience to such as are our Lawful Pastors ruling the Church by the power of the Keys according to the Word of God Though we think that requiring such Oaths is an irregularity in them against the ancient Canons and a farr higher presumption than the Independents Covenant 3. We do not deny a patient and quiet submission to unlawful persons and acts of Government not owning their sin our selves and doing no evil at their command But these are the things which we are not satisfied in I. Obedience hath essential Relation to the Laws and Mandates of those that we obey And the Canons of England are the Laws by which they openly profess to Rule the Church And therefore they call it the Oath of Canonical Obedience that is of obeying the Church Government according to the Canons And when we know the Canons before-hand we know what Government and Obedience is meant And we swear fraudulently if we take not the Oath in the sence of the Imposers And they commonly tell us that this is the meaning of Due Obedience and if Godly Admonitions or in licitis honestis be put in that doth but suppose that Obedience according to the Canons is Godly and licitum honestum and not that we are left to choose which Canons we will obey All Bishops I doubt not will stand to this Exposition of the sence Now there are abundance of things in the Canons which we think to be greater sins than we think meet to call them II. We know that the Rule of the Bishops is by Chancellors Courts and other such where Lay-men exercise the Church Keys by Decretive Excommunications and Absolutions which wise men think to be sacrilegious Usurpation and a Prophanation of a dreadful part of Christs Government And Lawyers and Civilians tell us that the word Ordinary signifieth the appointed Ordinary Judge of the Court and so that we swear or Covenant to obey Lay-Civilians using the Keys And other chief Ministers can mean no less than all the Archdeacons Officials Commissaries Surrogates c. whom we covenant to obey not in civil things or the circa Sacra belonging to Magistrates which we refuse not but in the exercise of the Church Keyes III. They that think they have fully proved that Diocesans Ruling many hundred Churches without any Bishops under them are an Office in Specie contrary to Gods Word and the practice of the Primitive Church and that it corrupteth or excludeth true Church Discipline do think it a sin to conform by an Oath of Allegiance or Obedience to them though they live peaceably under them IV. They that think that by Scripture and Reason and Universal Church Customs and Canons they are no Bishops or Pastors that come in by Magistrates without the Election or consent of the Flocks and Clergy think that to swear Obedience to them is to be guilty of their Usurpation These four be the things refused in this Oath and Covenant of Obedience L. And what have you against obeying according to the Canon M. I. You may gather it from the foregoing enumeration of the Canonical Impositions Many things of a heinouser nature than Liturgies Ceremonies or things Indifferent 1. We dare not obey an Order for Excommunication according to the 4th Canon against any man that affirmeth that the Book of Cammon-Prayer containeth any thing in it that is repugnant to the Scriptures Judge that by the proof that I shall anon give 2. The same I say of the Excommunication in Can. 5 6 7 8. and many others which are after to be particularly mentioned 3. And there are many things in the Canons which we dare not practice and therefore dare not swear Canonical Obedience L. That Oath doth not oblige you to approve of all that is in the Canons no more than a Iustices Oath to execute the Laws doth bind him to approve of or execute every Law. M. We would not be guilty of an over rigorous Exposition But had it been in the days of Queen Mary when the Six Articles and other Lawes for Murdering Innocents were on foot and were actually expounded by Execution I would not have been one of the Justices that should have sworn to execute them Though a Justice
a case that he understandeth not himself L How doth this make you a Voucher for their Souls M. 1. The case is of exceeding weight If I should publickly declare that no man is thus bound by a Vow and I should prove mistaken 1. Then I become guilty of all these mens sin by justifying it as no sin 2. And I am guilty of cruelty to their Souls in open telling them that they need not perform their Vows nor repent of non-performance 3. And Perjury is one of the heinousest sins on Earth 4. And the Perjury of Millions or Nations is yet one of the grievousest degrees of guilt 5. And I do my worst to make God destroy or forsake such a Land. And what yet can I do worse I say if in justifying them I should be mistaken what a guilt should I incur And doth Nature or Scripture bind me to run so great a hazard for so many thousand others Besides he that will be a Casuist must know all the case there are hundreds and thousands put upon these decisions that being then Children knew not who made the Covenant nor how it was imposed or taken and many that know not what it is and never saw it And there are thousands if not millions that took it whose Faces I never saw and know not what moved them nor in what sence they took it and Casuists say that if a man mistake the Imposers sence he is bound to keep it in the sence that he understood it when he took it if a lawful one especially if the Imposers had no Authority or their sence was doubtful And it is not uncharitable for me to think â—hat none of the Kings Compounding Lords or Clergy that after took it did take it in a sence which they thought found And must I tell them all that none of them is bound to keep it in that sound sence I will not run the danger of having thousands in judgment to suffer for Perjury and saying This man declared that it was no sin If they are all Innocent what need they my justification when they stand or fall by the judgment of God. If they prove guilty my declaring it no sin will not acquit them but condemn my own Soul by tempting them to impenitence I do not say that they are obliged by this Vow herein nor I will not say they are not There are many matters first to be known if we agree in point of Doctrine and I know that it 's an easie thing for confident men to multiply words to prove all lawful in this Oath and to Swear that it is rebellious Hearts that cause our doubtings and so say the Papists of the Protestants But whatever they say or threat I will not by their confidence and talk be drawn to cast my Soul into so great a hazard All men are not so bold in such things as some Chap. XXXVIII Point XXXV Of the Oxford Oath that we will never endeavour any alteration of Church Government M. THE Oxford Act is not content that we say that we are not bound by the Covenant to endeavour any alteration of Church Government but we must say and Swear that we never will endeavour it as any other way obliged to it L. The meaning is that you will never endeavour it by Rebellion Sedition or unlawful means M. The Parliament knew how to speak their minds By such Expositions you may Swear almost any thing in the World and no Government shall have any security by your Oaths The words are contrivedly as universal against all endeavour as can be spoken 2. But I 'll presently confute you undeniably You know Church and State Government are conjoined in the Oath and the Church put first Will you say as to State Government that the meaning only is That I will not endeavour to depose the King or alter Monarchy by Rebellion or any unlawful means but only by lawful means if you do you 'l soon be told home that the Oath doth mean That no means is lawful to such an end but the work it self as well as the means is forsnorn L. But the meaning is only that you will not endeavour to alter Episcopacy and not all other Offices and Courts M. This is as palpable a falsification as the former For 1. The words are a most express abjuration of endeavouring any alteration of Government at all And if you take the word Alteration strictly it more commonly signifieth a change of Quality or Manner 〈◊〉 of Essence But if you take it largely it comprehendeth both 2. And I appeal to any mans Conscience whether that was or is the Bishops sence Go ask them My Lords If I endeavour but to reduce Diocesans to every Corporation to take down your Lordships and great Revenues and your Chancellors Courts and all the rest of your Humane Officers will you take it for no breach of my Oath and I warrant you they will soon resolve you 3. Yet I shall fullier convince you The Bishops and Parliament are of the mind of the Church of England And the Canons do most fully speak the Churches mind And the Seventh Canon before cited when it makes it ipso facto Excommunication to call the Church Government sinful tells you that they extend this to Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Arch-deacons and the rest that bear Office therein 4. And I believe if you should say that I take my Oath to bind me from endeavouring no change of the Government of the State but only of the Essence of Monarchy you would quickly feel the Error of your Exposition L. But I can assure you that many able Conforming Ministers take the Declaration in the Act of Vniformity in such sences as aforesaid M. Our King is King of Scotland as well as of England and he hath thus declared his sence in the case of the Earl of Argyle and the Reasons of it are considerable And do you think that it can be the true sence in England and deserve preferment as to Loyal and Obedient Ministers which deserveth Death it self in Scotland can you wish for a clearer Exposition L. And why will you not Swear never to endeavour any alteration if you be required so to do M. I have read Dr. Stillingfleet's Irenicon and many such Books in which I see how great a number of our greatest Divines as well Arch-bishop Cranmer took the Form of Church Government to be alterable and not fixed by Christ And if the Doctor have changed his judgment that changeth not the Authority of those that he citeth 2. I have in my full Treatise of Episcopacy told you why I cannot but wish more than one thing in our Ecclesiastical Courts and Government changed 3. I take it for a matter that deserveth consideration whether it be no change of the State Government to make all the Church Government unchangeable and so to disable the King to change it And how to reconcile the two parts of the Oath And whether if the whole
Laws that all the Kings Subjects shall be extirpated that will not subscribe There is not one word in all the Statute Book or the most Learned Law-Books contrary to the Word of God and that the London Dispensatory hath no errour in Medicine and that no Licensed Book hath any errour in Divinity Verily if the Bishops and Clergy of England cannot give us better proofs of their infallibility or that their publick imposed Books are as free from errours as Adam was before his fall than by making all subscribe or swear or declare in the Church that it is so cowards may say your Lordships and Reverences have never an erroneous word but few men will believe it ever the more yea it will be the less believed that needeth such a proof as this Even as men would take him to be never the more an unerring Philosopher Lawyer or Physician who could force all the apprentice boys and women in the Town to swear that he is such Try first to make all the Kings Subjects of one opinion in all points of Learning Law or Trading and of one degree of wit and of stature and complexion and then hope to make them all of one measure of understanding not only in the substance of Religion but in all the little things that Bishops call indifferent and do or may impose L. But you run upon the Errour that all must have so great knowledge according to our rules as to know the Lawfulness of all Lawful things We know no Church-men reach so high But the way to Concord must be by obeying the Church in all cases that are doubtful to the Subjects M. 1. It 's well that you limit it to doubtful cases But what if I am past all doubt e. g. that it is a sin to make our sort of God-fathers the vowing Covenanters in Baptism excluding the Parents to cast out all from Christian Communion that scruple kneeling in the reception to deny Christendom to all that refuse our God-fathers and Crossings to pronounce all in England at Burial saved except the unbaptized excommunicate and self-murderers to profess that It is certain by the word of God that Infants excepting none baptized and dying before actual sin are undoubtedly saved To assent to a false rule to know Easter-day with many such What must I do in such undoubted cases 2. Tell us plainly Is it all doubted cases or some only in which you say we must obey If not all till you tell us which and how to know them you talk in vain If all what if men doubt whether Polygamy Lying Fornication c. be lawful Or what if a Papist doubt whether King-killing be lawful and the Clergy command it must it therefore needs be done 3. And I pray you tell us where and when it is that men must obey this rule Was it a duty in England in the days of Thomas Becket Anselm Dunstan c. or in the Reign of all the Kings that were Papists Is it a duty now in France Spain Italy Bavaria Austria c. or in the Dominion of the Turks Persians Tartarians China c Must all Subjects every where do all commanded them If they have but ignorance enough to be in doubt themselves sure they are bound to receive God's Light to overcome those doubts and in errour it is not obedience in Evil but seeking truth till they find it that is their duty But If you limit this Rule to Christians is it to all Christians If to Orthodox Rulers are the Subjects any fitter to judge whether their Kings and Bishops are Orthodox or not than whether the things imposed be good or bad If you dare say That all Subjects are bound to be of the Religion which their Kings or Bishops say is right speak out and you will need no confutation It 's granted by all sober men that as Rulers have the judgment of publick decision so every reasonable man must judge by private discerning whether his Actions be agreeable to God's Commands or not It is not Brutes and Infants but Men that have the use of reason that Kings and Bishops rule 4. But if you are stiff in the contrary opinion that all men must implicitely believe the King and Prelates in all that ignorance can but make them doubtful of I hope you have more brains than once to dream that ever you shall bring all the Kingdom to unite in this opinion and to lay by their reason and confess themselves Ideots or Brutes that must not labour to know whether they keep or break God's Supream Law or if you must rule men on these terms you must keep them in fetters and not at liberty And I pray you dishonour not the King so much as to make him a King of Beasts and Ideots and not of Men or Christians or at least expose him not so much to the Power of Usurpers as to say that his Subjects are not the Discerning Iudges who is their True and Lawful Soveraign and who not and if they must judge whether all their actions be agreeable to the Kings Laws or not lest they be hang'd or punished allow them also to judge whether or no they be agreeable to God's Law lest they be damned If men once believe that God is not their Supream Governour no wonder if they believe that Kings have no Governing right nor any are bound in conscience to obey them for who can give Governing Authority or who can bind Conscience to obey it but the absolute Soveraign the Almighty God L. Experience confuteth all that you have said what Countries live in greater Vnity than those that have procured and kept it by violence and do endure no Dissenters as Spain and Italy M. It seems you know not what you say 1. The Pope and Spaniards and Italians allow greater differences by many degrees than those that you condemn Dissenters for their Iesuits and Dominicans Thomists Scotists Nominals Durandists c. differ so much from each others in Doctrinals about God and Grace and Free-will and Providence and the Cause of Sin and many other Points that the Volumes they have written for their several Opinions make up huge Libraries which employ the hard studies of the most Learned men in the World and are as far as ever from being ended 2. The Iansenists and Iesuits differ not only in such Doctrines about Predestination Redemption Grace Free-will Perseverance c. but also about abundance of Doctrines commonly called Moral as about Murder Perjury Fornication Stealing c. as you may see in the Books lately published by the Iansenists against the Iesuits And though approved general Councils have made the doctrine of Deposing Excommunicated Princes and Absolving their Subjects from their Allegiance and giving their Dominions to others to be a very part of their Religion yet are not the Papists agreed in it but the Germans in the days of the Emperours Frederick Otho Henry 4th and 5th c. and the French to this day are